the role of nuclear energy systems in low-carbon energy ... gibon.pdf · the benefits, risks and...

The role of nuclear energy systems in low-carbon energy scenarios

Lead authors:Thomas Gibon, Edgar Hertwich, SangwonSuh, Jacqueline Aloiside Larderel, Joe Bergesen

14th IAEA INPRO Discussion ForumJune6th 2017

www.unep.org/resourcepanel

This research work was carried out at

http://www.unep.org/resourcepanel

Green Energy Choices The Benefits, Risks and Trade-offs of Low-Carbon Technologies for Electricity Production

Agenda

Background

Technology summary

Comparison

Scenarios

Conclusions and outlook

2


The Challenge

3

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

2012 2020 2030 2040 2050

Gt C

O 2

Renewables 30%CCS 13%Power generation efficiency and fuel switching 1%End-use fuel switching 10%End-use fuel and electricity efficiency 38%Nuclear 8%

Baseline emissions 56 Gt

BLUE Map emissions 14 Gt

[IEA Energy Technology Perspectives, 2015]

Which technologies for electricity generation can

reduce both GHG emissions and avoid impacts on human

health and ecosystems?


Low-carbon electricity & the Paris Agreement

4

http ://unsdsn.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Key-Elements-for-Success-at-COP21.pdf

http://unsdsn.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Key-Elements-for-Success-at-COP21.pdf


Low-carbon electricity & the Paris Agreement

5

http://www.iea.org/cop21/

http://www.iea.org/cop21/


IPCC: A near-complete shift to low -carbon energy sources is required for any stabilization target

6

Important electricity increases in almost all IPCC scenarios

resulting from wide implementation of low-carbon technologies – regardless of

climate goals

2.6°C 2.2°C 1.9°C 1.6°C

[IPCC WGIII AR5, 2014]


Greenhouse gas emissions of electricity technologies (1/2)

7

[Figure7.6, IPCC WGIII AR5, 2014]


Greenhouse gas emissions of electricity technologies (2/2)

8



Particulate matter emissions

9


Coal technologies even with state-of-art emission control

have high emissions of particulate and of pollutants

forming fine particulates in the atmosphere (SO2, NOx, NH3)

As a non-combustion technology, nuclearpower

naturallyemits lower amountsof particulate matter over its

life cycle


Assessment approach, and method

10

Nin

eele

ctric

ityte

chno

logi

es • Coal and…• …gas with and without CO2

capture and storage (CCS), • Photovoltaic power, • Concentrated solar power, • Hydropower, • Geothermal,• Wind power,• + Nuclear,• + Biopower.

Impa

ctca

tego

ries • Damage on human health

• particulate matter,• human toxicity

• Damage on ecosystems• ecotoxicity,• eutrophication,• acidification…

• Resource use• iron, copper, aluminium,

cement,• energy, water and land

Life

cyc

lepe

rspe

ctiv

e • Extractionof rawmaterials,• Fuelsupplychain,• Production of power plants,• Transportation• Operation,• Maintenance,• Decommissioning.


Agenda

Background

Technology summary

Comparison

Scenarios


11


What are the environmental , health and resource use implications of a massive expansion of low-carbon electricity ?

A 5MW offshore wind turbine requires

1200 tons of steel

350 000such wind turbines with would

be required to provide 12% electricity in

2050

12


What are the environmental, health and resource use implications of a massive expansion of low-carbon electricity?

A typical photovoltaic power plant produces

0.3 kWhper m2

per day

13

©Lucas Braun


What are the environmental, health and resource use implications of a massive expansion of low-carbon electricity?

14

3.2 million premature deaths

from particulate matter


Technology summaryWind power

• Very low GHG emissions (++)

Climate change

• Reduced exposure to particulate matter (++)• Reduced human toxicity (--)

Human Health

• Collision fatalities of birds and bats (+=)• Reduced ecotoxicityand eutrophication (=-)

Ecosystems

• Increased consumption of bulk metals (+=)• Low water use (==)• Low direct land use (==)

Resources

15

Key (##)First symbol(+) high agreement among studies (=) moderate agreement (-) low agreementSecond symbol(+) robust evidence (many studies) (=) medium evidence (-) limited evidence

©Jeff Adkins



Low-impact projects

• Good wind conditions • Limiting bird and bat

collision• End-of-life

management, recycling

16

©Jeff Adkins


Technology summarySolar photovoltaics

17

• Lowcarbon(==)

Climate change

• Lowparticulatematter emissions(+=)• Lowhuman toxicity (if proper recycling, =-)

Human health

• Loweutrophication and ecotoxicity(+-)

Ecosystemhealth

• High metal use(balanceof system, module, +=)• High direct land use for ground-based systems (++)

ResourcesKey (##)

First symbol(+) high agreement among studies (=) moderate agreement (-) low agreementSecond symbol(+) robust evidence (many studies) (=) medium evidence (-) limited evidence

©ElenaElisseeva/Shutterstock



Low-impact projects

• Using clean energy for manufacturing

• Recycling• Roof-mounted

18

©ElenaElisseeva/Shutterstock


Technology summaryConcentrating solar power

19

• Low GHG emissions (==)

Climate Change

• Low particular matter exposure (+=)• Low human toxicity (=-)

Human Health

• Potential toxicity of heat transfer fluids (+=)• Low ecotoxicity and eutrophication (+-)

Ecosystems

• High water consumption, unless air cooled (++)• High land use (++)• High cement use (power tower, +-)

Resources


©Ethan Miller/Getty Images



Low-impact projects • Using heat storage to

produce electricity in the evening and night, thereby avoiding backup power

• Siting avoiding sensitive habitat

• Good management of heat transfer cycle

20

©Ethan Miller/Getty Images


Technology summaryHydropower

22

• Lowfossil carbon(++)• High biogeniccarbonfrom tropical dams (==)

Climate change

• Lowair pollution impacts(=-)• Populationdisplacement(+-)

Human health

• Riparianhabitat change(++)

Ecosystemhealth

• Water use(evaporation, +-)• High land use for reservoirs (+=)• High cementuse(tower only, +-)

Resources




Low-impact projects• Environmental stream

flow and other mitigating measures can reduce ecological impact

• Ensure high power density to limit biogenic methane emissions

23


Technology summaryGeothermal power

24

• Lowcarbon(==)

Climate change

• Lowparticulatematter (+=)• Variable human toxicity (site-specific geogenic

emissions, --)

Human health

• Low eutrophication and ecotoxicity (+-)

Ecosystemhealth

• High water use (if used for cooling, ++)• High land use (++)

ResourcesKey (##)

First symbol(+) high agreement among studies (=) moderate agreement (-) low agreementSecond symbol(+) robust evidence (many studies) (=) medium evidence (-) limited evidence



Low-impact projects

• Direct emissions can be very high and uncertain

• Site-specific geogenic emissions

25


Technology summaryCoal and natural gas power, with CO2 capture and storage

26

• LowGHG (++)• Substantialfugitive methaneemissions(==)• Concernabout CO2 leakage(-=)

Climate change

• Solvent relatedemissions(==)• High particulatematter (==)• High human toxicity (=-)

Human health

• High eutrophication (mining, ++)• Ecotoxicity(+=)

Ecosystemhealth

• Increasedfossil fuel consumption (++)• Limited CO2 storage(++)

Resources©Reuters




Low-impact projects

• Reduced emissions in fuel production and transport

• Geology for storage• Sourcing

27

©Reuters


Technology summaryNuclear power

28

• LowGHG (++)• Concernabout impactsfrom decommissioning(-=)

Climate change

• Technology with highest ionizing radiation impact (==)

Human health

• Ecotoxicity impactsfrom uraniummining (+=)• Lowland occupation(++)

Ecosystemhealth

• Uraniumdepletion not yet an urgent concern(==)• Concernabout nuclearwastestorage(+=)

Resources ©Reuters



Technology summaryNuclear power: the impact of the fuel ’s supply chain

• Uraniummininggeneratessimilarimpactsas coalmining… per kg

• …but 1 kWh nuclearelectricityrequires~3 µg ofenricheduranium(~25 µg ofuraniumore), vs. 0.6 kg coalextracted/kWh el.

29


Technology summaryNuclear power: the elusive impact of decommissioning

• The environmentalimpacts of decommissioningremainshighlyuncertain due to the lackof hindsight

• “While building and commissioning a nuclear power plant is comparable to the respective process of a fossil power plant, decommissioning involves a much higher effort due to the requirements of decontamination and safe storage of nuclear residues which come along with higher energy and material demands compared to the shutdown of a conventional power plant” (Seier& Zimmermann 2014)

30

[Seier and Zimmermann, 2014]


Agenda

Background

Technology summary

Comparison

Scenarios


32


33

[Gibon, Hertwich, Arvesen, Singh, Verones (2017)

Health benefits, ecological threats of low-carbon

electricity. Environmental Research Letters]


34





35





36





37





Agenda

Background

Technology summary

Comparison

Scenarios


38


39

[Gibon, Hertwich, Arvesen, Singh, Verones (2017) Health benefits, ecological threats of low-carbon electricity. Environmental Research Letters]


Scenarios

40


Agenda

Background

Technology summary

Comparison

Scenarios


42


Conclusions and outlook 1/3

Life-cycle GHG emissions of electricity produced from renewable sources are less

than 6%of those generated by coal or 10%by natural gas.

Using solar, wind, hydro, nuclear, and geothermal power instead of fossil fuels

reduces GHG emissions andother pollution impacts on human health and ecosystems.

Impacts are reduced by a factor of 3-10.

Human health impacts from renewa electricity are only 10-30%of those from

the state-of-the-art fossil fuel power.

Natural-gas combined cycle plants, wind power, nuclear, and roof-mounted solar

power systems have low land use requirements, while coal fired power

plants and ground-mounted solar power require larger areas of land.

Site-specific environmental impacts, such as the ecological impacts of coalmines, hydropower dams and wind turbine

installations, vary greatly, depending on the significance of the species and habitats

affected and may be mitigated or offset by proper site selection and planning.

CO2capture and storage can reduce G emissions by 50-75%, at the expense of

increasing other types of pollutionby 5-80%.

43


Conclusionsand outlook 2/3

44

Low-carbon energy technologies can decarbonize the economy

substantially, in turn “cleaning” the processesused to build new

power plants

Nuclear energy appears as the baseload/scalable technology with the lowest overall impact (even including ionizing radiation), both on human health and ecosystems

Excluding the damage from the impact on climate change and land occupation, nuclear power even has one of the lowest overall health and ecological impact

More data is needed on new technologies and end-of-life

managementfor nuclear plants


Conclusionsand outlookFurther work

Test more scenarios and scenario families

TIMES

POLES

ADEME

IPCC…

Extend with emerging technologies

Power sector• Next-gen nuclear, biomass…• Storage

Mobility sector• Passenger transportation (ongoing work)• Freight

Building sector• Energy management systems,• (n)ZEB…

45


Bibliography

Gibon, T.; Wood, R.; Arvesen, A.; Bergesen, J. D.; Suh, S.; Hertwich, E. G., A Methodology for Integrated, Multiregional Life CycleAssessmentScenarios under Large-ScaleTechnologicalChange. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49, (18), 11218–11226.Gibon, T.; Hertwich, E. G.; Arvesen, A.; Singh, B.; Verones, F. Health benefits, ecological threats of low-carbon electricityEnviron. Res. Lett. 2017, 12 034023International Energy AgencyEnergy Technology Perspectives2015 –Mobilising Innovationto AccelerateClimateAction; Paris, 2015.Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change; 2014.Seier, M.; Zimmermann, T. 2015 Environmental impacts of decommissioning nuclear power plants: methodical challenges, case study, and implications. Int J Life Cycle Assess. DOI: 10.1007/s11367-014-0794-2UNEP International Resource Panel 2016 Green Energy Choices: the benefits, risks and trade-offs of low-carbon technologies for electricity production

46


47

For more information please visit:www.unep.org/resourcepanel

This research work was carried out at

Thank [email protected]

linkedin.com/in/ thomasgibon

http://www.resourcepanel.org/reports/green-energy-choices-benefits-risks-and-trade-offs-low-carbon-technologies-electricity

http://www.unep.org/resourcepanel

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.resourcepanel.org/reports/green-energy-choices-benefits-risks-and-trade-offs-low-carbon-technologies-electricity


ADDITIONALFIGURES

48


49



Human health impacts[DALY*/TWh]

Damage to ecosystems[species·yr/TWh]

50

*DALY = Disability-adjustedlife year, a measure of overall disease burden, excl. effects of climate change Excluding effects of climate change and land use





52






53






54






55



Technology summaryNuclear power




Additionalresults, not includedin the original report


Technology summaryBiopower



57


Additionalresults, not includedin the original report


Materials cause >50% of Industrial GHG emissionsMaterial cycles important for mitigation

(1) Energy efficiency

(2) Clean energy

(3a) Material efficiency in production

(3b) Material efficiency in product design

(4) Product-service efficiency

(5) Reduction in demand

Material efficiency and reduction of material use now recognized as important.

Trade-offs!

58


59


Scenarios

60


61


62


63


64

the role of nuclear energy systems in low-carbon energy ... gibon.pdf · the benefits, risks and...

Documents